Extremely Disappointed - Storm Atranoch Nerf

Origin

Nightreaver wrote: »

Stun wears off and all mobs run straight toward the caster completely ignoring the Atronach. (This is with the caster doing zero additional damage past the initial casting of the Atronach). The Atronach picks a target and begins channeling its lightning attack doing around 250 DPS. If its target dies it picks another.

This is exactly what is happening and why the change is significantly diminishing the role of the Atronach. Before the change the Atronach was my favorite ultimate. Right now I don't see a reason to use it so I have removed the Atronach from my bar. I use now the Overload ultimate which I find it more useful for doing damage.

I don't think that solving a problem that is affecting the trials by impacting the rest of the PVE gaming is the best approach. For sure there are other ways of addressing the trials issue.

I will not comment on the fact that a group should work together and they should manage the restriction in the use of the atronachs if this is creating problems. Or on the fact that the source of the problem is the limitation in the numbers of taunts after which a target gets immunity (and how is this affecting the tanking in the game).

This practice of modifying abilities in order to address problems that are affecting a small part of the game or just a portion of the subscriber base and by this creating problems in the rest of the game has become a trend.
Several changes have been done at the request of PvP players or to prevent them to exploit the game mechanics.
As a result, some of the affected abilities are now broke - see the DK's Fiery Reach that you cannot use now it if the target is in a ramp inclined at a small angle.

ghengis_dhan

I don't know what some people are talking about. The Storm Atronach (sparky) is still the best ultimate in my opinion. Sure, the boss now targets you after the initial stun, but from my experience, it doesn't take long before most bosses realize who is doing the real damage and turns to fight sparky.

Also, if you are playing as a glass cannon, expect to die a lot. Glass cannon can dish out the damage, but they can't take it. That's why I'm a heavy armor mage. Sure, I deal slightly less damage, but I can also take a pounding.

Maverick827

ghengis_dhan wrote: »

I don't know what some people are talking about. The Storm Atronach (sparky) is still the best ultimate in my opinion. Sure, the boss now targets you after the initial stun, but from my experience, it doesn't take long before most bosses realize who is doing the real damage and turns to fight sparky.

Also, if you are playing as a glass cannon, expect to die a lot. Glass cannon can dish out the damage, but they can't take it. That's why I'm a heavy armor mage. Sure, I deal slightly less damage, but I can also take a pounding.

The point of this thread was that the Atranoch used to be a good tool for tanks. You could use it to take the heat off of you for a little bit, let your healer catch up, etc. It was like a damage shield, it absorbed damage.

Now that it doesn't taunt, it doesn't do that. And Sorcorers are left with no useful tanking ultimates.

AtriasNaradan

No, it's not like damage shield, you can't add gaps with the enemy using damage shield. It's like stun skill, which allows you to run away a bit and restore stats, but it's superior as it always works, even on boss, since taunt is not a negative effects. It's a solo/group DPS sorceress ultimate before due to taunt property of it, now with taunt gone it is actually becoming more of a tank and/or group DPS ultimate.

Maverick827

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

No, it's not like damage shield, you can't add gaps with the enemy using damage shield. It's like stun skill, which allows you to run away a bit and restore stats, but it's superior as it always works, even on boss, since taunt is not a negative effects. It's a solo/group DPS sorceress ultimate before due to taunt property of it, now with taunt gone it is actually becoming more of a tank and/or group DPS ultimate.

Yes, it is exactly like a damage shield on bosses. It cannot stun bosses so it does not "create a gap," which isn't even a very useful thing for a group boss encounter.

After the taunt it is 0% a tank ultimate. It is 100% a DPS ultimate now.

AtriasNaradan

Maverick827 wrote: »

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

No, it's not like damage shield, you can't add gaps with the enemy using damage shield. It's like stun skill, which allows you to run away a bit and restore stats, but it's superior as it always works, even on boss, since taunt is not a negative effects. It's a solo/group DPS sorceress ultimate before due to taunt property of it, now with taunt gone it is actually becoming more of a tank and/or group DPS ultimate.

Yes, it is exactly like a damage shield on bosses. It cannot stun bosses so it does not "create a gap," which isn't even a very useful thing for a group boss encounter.

After the taunt it is 0% a tank ultimate. It is 100% a DPS ultimate now.

It taunt the boss on the atronachs not the player, creating a gap between player is simply by running away before the atronach die (if they die at all before the boss). The very same gap creation stun abilities makes with non-boss. SA taunt is basically a more powerful version of gap creation that can be used against boss (no boss immune to taunt), while stun only effective gap creator for non-boss. The only difference is that the boss doesn't stunned, but taunted...still, your player is free to run away.

And no its not like damage shield, even idiots knows that damage shield doesn't make it easy for you to create gap with a boss...the boss still chasing the player.

spinedoc

This change stinks IMO, but it's not the worst thing they could have done.

Kind of off topic, but which morph do you all suggest for a non PVP player who aspires mainly to raid/trials eventually? I'm VR6 and I haven't morphed it yet due to indecision.

Nightreaver

spinedoc wrote: »

Kind of off topic, but which morph do you all suggest for a non PVP player who aspires mainly to raid/trials eventually? I'm VR6 and I haven't morphed it yet due to indecision.

Ok, let's look at the difference between the two current versions.

Both do a single target channeling attack that does 200-300 DPS depending on level and Magicka so for the sake of argument lets say 250.
The AOE version adds a PBAOE shock wave that does roughly double that damage so let's say 500.
The ST version adds increased Health and extends the duration from 18 seconds to 28 seconds.

The ST version is easy to understand. Increasing the duration increases its damage by another 2500 damage. Increasing its health increases the chance it will survive for the duration.

The AOE version sends out 3 shock waves during the course of its duration that last 1 second each.

So things to consider
1) The AOE damage is not constant, it comes in 3 pulses over the course of the 18 second duration.
2) The AOE version would have to hit 10 mobs over the course of the 3 shock waves just to equal the damage of the ST version. (So 3+ mobs per wave)
3) The AOE attacks are PBAOE with a range of 6 (8 with passive ability). If there are no mobs within that range during those phases then its DPS is zero. (It stops its Channeled Lightning attack during these phases.)
4) You have no control over when those AOE attacks occur.
5) Even if you summon the Atronach on top of a group of adds the adds are often dead or close to it by the time the first AOE shock wave goes off.
6) The channeled Lightning attack has a much larger range ensuring constant damage throughout its duration.
7) The increased Health of the ST version increases the chance of it lasting for its full duration. The longer it lasts, the more damage it does.

I personally can't justify the existence of the AOE morph and would really like to see it replaced with a version with taunt.

Vizier

Armann wrote: »

NB can already do alot better solo against CC immune bosses in public dungeons and overland bosses with the help of Shadow Cloak which doesn't require ultimate to sustain. If the argument was unfairness towards non-Sorcerers incapability to tackle these mobs then by all rights should Shadow Cloak suffer the same fate in "fairness". I'm not complaining though, I currently play a NB and left my Sorcerer behind.

NB do better solo because of Shadow Cloak? Are you kidding me? It lasts for 2.5 seconds takes a ton of Magicka and doesn't work half the time as intended or needed. Your comparing a broken base NB skill to a Sorc ultimate? Rather compare Sorc Summoning to Shadow Cloak and that's still a stretch. Doesn't the sorc also have the ability to summon a bunch of other creatures that might take agro? ...just asking.

Q: "Should Shadow Cloak suffer the same fate...?"
A: HELL NO. Shadow cloak needs some love. Sorcs need a little Nerf Battage IMO.

Armann

Vizier wrote: »

Sorcs need a little Nerf Battage IMO.

Why, would that make you feel better? Would that fix your issues with the NB? Cloak saved my ass many times, Storm Atronach used to do that too, not anymore, and it's an ultimate. Cloak is bugged, SA had a core function that has been in the game until now removed, bugs can be fixed, SA won't be fixed cause it is not bugged.

Devs listening to people like you is why we can never have nice things and why they never should have made classes for this game.

Vizier

Armann wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

Sorcs need a little Nerf Battage IMO.

Why, would that make you feel better? Would that fix your issues with the NB? Cloak saved my ass many times, Storm Atronach used to do that too, not anymore, and it's an ultimate. Cloak is bugged, SA had a core function that has been in the game until now removed, bugs can be fixed, SA won't be fixed cause it is not bugged.

Devs listening to people like you is why we can never have nice things and why they never should have made classes for this game.

And comparing SC to Sorc ultimate is helping the devs perspective? That will help SA? I think not. I didn't bring it up buddy. You did with an irrelevant and absurd comparison as if you have some axe to grind with NB abilities. Rather you focus on the complaint that SA isn't very effective and to that I might agree. I've seen SA popped on single DK who didn't even bat an eye. Waded right through it health bar didn't drop a bit. I think I even heard him scream it tickled. Then of course I don't think another ultimate other than perhaps Bat Swarm would have or Soul Tether would have had much effect which may not be an ultimate issue but that's another discussion.

Nightreaver

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

My options are not any more important, just saying for everyone to be more flexible.

And yet here you are telling people they shouldn't be using an Atronach with taunt, that they should be doing it your way. Adding Taunt as one morph option would add flexibility, not decrease it.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

There are plenty options, SA isn't the only one, what makes options that use SA any more important than those who didn't?

Again, I think you have this backwards. First off, the issue isn't about comparing SA to other Ultimates. The issue is having two SA morphs with no taunt vs. one morph option that includes taunt and one morph option that doesn't. You believe that Taunt should be removed from both morph options which would suggest you feel your way is more important. I on the other hand feel that both options should be available believing they are both important.

Nightreaver wrote: »

not a single argument for replacing the AOE Atronach morph with one that includes Taunt. Or even a reason for the AOE morph to even exist.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

...my answer is, don't ask me about that, ask those tank sorceress who need distractions so much. I for one never use SA for distraction anyway, just for faster mobs kill with the ultimate pet DPS.

Actually you are exactly the Sorceress I should be asking. You and anyone else who believes there shouldn't be a morph option for SA that includes taunt. The thread includes reasons why it should be included. I'm still waiting on even one as to why it shouldn't.

Vizier wrote: »

Q: "Should Shadow Cloak suffer the same fate...?"
A: HELL NO. Shadow cloak needs some love. Sorcs need a little Nerf Battage IMO.

Did I miss the update that didn't include a Sorc nerf?
You just agreed that you didn't think SA was very effective so just curious, what, how and why do you think Sorcs should be nerfed now. Or is this just another "Buff me and nerf everyone else" post?

Paralyse

Why this change sucks:

Pre-nerf:

1. Stand at max range
2. Drop Storm Atronach
3. Nuke bad guys from afar while Storm Atronach DPS's them and keeps them busy

Post-nerf:

1. Stand at max range
2. Drop Storm Atronach
3. Watch entire pack of bad guys ignore Storm Atronach and run to smash your face in while laughing maniacally as your Stormie flails around out of range.

Whomever thought this was a good idea should be informed that it was not. Removing almost all of the utility from a Sorc Ultimate by making it only useful in melee range (and who plays a Melee Sorc anyway?) is just wrong.

AtriasNaradan

Nightreaver wrote: »

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

My options are not any more important, just saying for everyone to be more flexible.

And yet here you are telling people they shouldn't be using an Atronach with taunt, that they should be doing it your way. Adding Taunt as one morph option would add flexibility, not decrease it.

You argue for the sake of arguing, should stop doin that. I'm asking people to be felxible, and being flexible means that you go with what're available. Adding taunt to SA isn't adding more flexibility, it just adding more weapons to choose from. Analogy: You got five effective weapons. Now your favourite is taken. Being flexible means you just choose from the other four, they're still effective anyway.

If you can't live without one skill, then you're simply not flexible. It would be different if no one can play without that skill from that class, but in this case, many can do it without SA taunt. So, be flexible.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

There are plenty options, SA isn't the only one, what makes options that use SA any more important than those who didn't?

Again, I think you have this backwards. First off, the issue isn't about comparing SA to other Ultimates. The issue is having two SA morphs with no taunt vs. one morph option that includes taunt and one morph option that doesn't. You believe that Taunt should be removed from both morph options which would suggest you feel your way is more important. I on the other hand feel that both options should be available believing they are both important.

I believe people should be flexible and go with whatever they're given. When there's nothing effective can be used other than SA taunt, only then it's a legit problem.

Nightreaver wrote: »

not a single argument for replacing the AOE Atronach morph with one that includes Taunt. Or even a reason for the AOE morph to even exist.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

...my answer is, don't ask me about that, ask those tank sorceress who need distractions so much. I for one never use SA for distraction anyway, just for faster mobs kill with the ultimate pet DPS.

Actually you are exactly the Sorceress I should be asking. You and anyone else who believes there shouldn't be a morph option for SA that includes taunt. The thread includes reasons why it should be included. I'm still waiting on even one as to why it shouldn't.

The above answers already sum it up.


Anyway, all my comment was started as a disagreement with tank who needs distraction, and you spread it to other places where there's no connection at all. Why ask me questions unrelated to my original comments at all? that should be the real question here.

Before you demand any other answers or argument from me, answer my question first: Why did you find the need to argue my statement against sorceress tanks, using your sorceress DPS point of view? You're criticizing my critics to an apple using an orange point of view, logic?

Maverick827

Your argument is essentially "just deal with it," only you're hiding it behind some guise of being "flexible."

I'm sorry, but that is not a valid argument. We should not remain silent and "be flexible" and move on. We should voice our opinions, which is what this thread is.

Saying "the taunt should not be added back because you should just get over it and adapt" is not an argument against why it should be added back. It's just spam, and if you continue with this line of reasoning, it will be treated as such.

Persephonius

Maverick827 wrote: »

Your argument is essentially "just deal with it," only you're hiding it behind some guise of being "flexible."

I'm sorry, but that is not a valid argument. We should not remain silent and "be flexible" and move on. We should voice our opinions, which is what this thread is.

Saying "the taunt should not be added back because you should just get over it and adapt" is not an argument against why it should be added back. It's just spam, and if you continue with this line of reasoning, it will be treated as such.

Ok I have broken my statement of no longer posting in this thread.

@Maverick827, you cannot take ownership of this thread and tell people how their posts are to be treated. Players disagree with you, they have a right to do so. They are posting in this thread because of the same reason you just stated, they are voicing there opinions/concerns over a class change. There is clearly many players that disagree with you here, and you have to accept that.

I am surprised this thread has not been closed yet to be honest.

Vizier

Nightreaver wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

Q: "Should Shadow Cloak suffer the same fate...?"
A: HELL NO. Shadow cloak needs some love. Sorcs need a little Nerf Battage IMO.

Did I miss the update that didn't include a Sorc nerf?
You just agreed that you didn't think SA was very effective so just curious, what, how and why do you think Sorcs should be nerfed now. Or is this just another "Buff me and nerf everyone else" post?

I probably should have been more specific, because like all classes there are some skills that are underwhelming and SA seems to be one of those atm. That said there are other aspects about light armor, perks in conjunction with sorc perks, staff builds, Bolt Escape etc, that could probably use a little "tweaking." I didn't really want to get into that though since it would detract from the topic at hand and so I kept my comment mostly about SA.

I don't really care how they achieve relative balance in ESO. If it's through nerfing classes and skills or bolstering other classes and skills, I'll take it, so long as it happens at some point.

Nightreaver

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

You argue for the sake of arguing, should stop doin that.

This is apparently your response to everyone that disagrees with you.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

I'm asking people to be felxible, and being flexible means that you go with what're available. Adding taunt to SA isn't adding more flexibility, it just adding more weapons to choose from. Analogy: You got five effective weapons. Now your favourite is taken. Being flexible means you just choose from the other four, they're still effective anyway.

Your analogy is wrong so let me provide a more accurate one.
We had a bow, it was taken away and replaced with a gun. You prefer guns and feel people shouldn't be using a bow so claim that people should be "flexible" and just accept it. I feel that both choices should be allowed. Choices mean more flexibility presenting more than one way to achieve the same goal.
You didn't just take away one of five choices. You took away one person's way of doing something and replaced it with something that makes your way better and then told us to just accept it.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

If you can't live without one skill, then you're simply not flexible. It would be different if no one can play without that skill from that class,

Translation: If we can't do it your way we're not being flexible.
The reason for the change was because people were being forced to drop a skill they couldn't live without because it did have taunt. Shouldn't you be telling those people that THEY should've been more flexible and learned to play without that skill?
You want it to be one way or the other and of course you want that one way to be your way. I'm still waiting on why you are so against giving people the option to do both. Sorry, but I've always hated the whole "There are two ways to do something, my way and the wrong way" attitude.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

Before you demand any other answers or argument from me, answer my question first: Why did you find the need to argue my statement against sorceress tanks, using your sorceress DPS point of view? You're criticizing my critics to an apple using an orange point of view, logic?

The purpose of this thread was to discuss the need to provide taunt as a morph option for Atronach. You stated there was no need for a tank to use it. I responded to emphasize the point that most Sorcerers are DPS who prefer to keep a distance between themselves and their target and having an Ultimate with Taunt provided that means. You took my statement and made it an issue about tanking.

You're criticizing the need of an Ultimate with Taunt for tanking. I'm criticizing the removal of taunt as an option. Apples to Oranges? Maybe, but my issue is at least on topic.

So ok, I've answered your question. Now will you answer mine and tell me why both options (one with taunt, one without) shouldn't be available or why the AOE version even exists?

@Vizier‌
I agree that there are still balancing issues and I have no issue with people raising concerns even when it is against a class/role that I play. I just always hated the blanket statement "_____ class needs to be nerfed. I too want balance but if a class (any class) is going to be nerfed then I want to know it is for the right reasons.

Maverick827

Persephonius wrote: »

Maverick827 wrote: »

Your argument is essentially "just deal with it," only you're hiding it behind some guise of being "flexible."

I'm sorry, but that is not a valid argument. We should not remain silent and "be flexible" and move on. We should voice our opinions, which is what this thread is.

Saying "the taunt should not be added back because you should just get over it and adapt" is not an argument against why it should be added back. It's just spam, and if you continue with this line of reasoning, it will be treated as such.

Ok I have broken my statement of no longer posting in this thread.

@Maverick827, you cannot take ownership of this thread and tell people how their posts are to be treated. Players disagree with you, they have a right to do so. They are posting in this thread because of the same reason you just stated, they are voicing there opinions/concerns over a class change. There is clearly many players that disagree with you here, and you have to accept that.

I am surprised this thread has not been closed yet to be honest.

For one, I started the thread, so I don't think "taking ownership" is really out of line. Since this thread is arguing in favor of making a change rather than leaving things the way they are, I have a vested interest in keeping it on track (whereas those who are opposed only need for it to remain ignored to get their way). A person coming in here and essentially telling everyone to "deal with it" is not helpful.

I accept that many people might disagree, but so far no one has provided a good reason why the taunt can't be added on the morph that no one uses. Or added back and only have the taunt triggered on a keybind. Or why some sort of damage reduction couldn't be added while the Atronach is active, like every other class has tacked on to their ultimates. This isn't a poll; opinions without an argument don't work.

Persephonius

Maverick827 wrote: »

Persephonius wrote: »

Maverick827 wrote: »

Your argument is essentially "just deal with it," only you're hiding it behind some guise of being "flexible."

I'm sorry, but that is not a valid argument. We should not remain silent and "be flexible" and move on. We should voice our opinions, which is what this thread is.

Saying "the taunt should not be added back because you should just get over it and adapt" is not an argument against why it should be added back. It's just spam, and if you continue with this line of reasoning, it will be treated as such.

Ok I have broken my statement of no longer posting in this thread.

@Maverick827, you cannot take ownership of this thread and tell people how their posts are to be treated. Players disagree with you, they have a right to do so. They are posting in this thread because of the same reason you just stated, they are voicing there opinions/concerns over a class change. There is clearly many players that disagree with you here, and you have to accept that.

I am surprised this thread has not been closed yet to be honest.

For one, I started the thread, so I don't think "taking ownership" is really out of line. Since this thread is arguing in favor of making a change rather than leaving things the way they are, I have a vested interest in keeping it on track (whereas those who are opposed only need for it to remain ignored to get their way). A person coming in here and essentially telling everyone to "deal with it" is not helpful.

I accept that many people might disagree, but so far no one has provided a good reason why the taunt can't be added on the morph that no one uses. Or added back and only have the taunt triggered on a keybind. Or why some sort of damage reduction couldn't be added while the Atronach is active, like every other class has tacked on to their ultimates. This isn't a poll; opinions without an argument don't work.

Actually, a statement such as 'deal with it' is a very, very valid statement. If you have ever played any other MMO's, you would know that class abilities are altered often, usually requiring players to alter there rotations/set-ups as what they were doing no longer works, as seemingly may be the case here. "Deal with it' is a fairly ubiquitous statement made in many threads of many MMO's if you look, and is the general principle we all have to abide by in MMO's at some point.

Maverick827

Persephonius wrote: »

Maverick827 wrote: »

Persephonius wrote: »

Maverick827 wrote: »

Your argument is essentially "just deal with it," only you're hiding it behind some guise of being "flexible."

I'm sorry, but that is not a valid argument. We should not remain silent and "be flexible" and move on. We should voice our opinions, which is what this thread is.

Saying "the taunt should not be added back because you should just get over it and adapt" is not an argument against why it should be added back. It's just spam, and if you continue with this line of reasoning, it will be treated as such.

Ok I have broken my statement of no longer posting in this thread.

@Maverick827, you cannot take ownership of this thread and tell people how their posts are to be treated. Players disagree with you, they have a right to do so. They are posting in this thread because of the same reason you just stated, they are voicing there opinions/concerns over a class change. There is clearly many players that disagree with you here, and you have to accept that.

I am surprised this thread has not been closed yet to be honest.

For one, I started the thread, so I don't think "taking ownership" is really out of line. Since this thread is arguing in favor of making a change rather than leaving things the way they are, I have a vested interest in keeping it on track (whereas those who are opposed only need for it to remain ignored to get their way). A person coming in here and essentially telling everyone to "deal with it" is not helpful.

I accept that many people might disagree, but so far no one has provided a good reason why the taunt can't be added on the morph that no one uses. Or added back and only have the taunt triggered on a keybind. Or why some sort of damage reduction couldn't be added while the Atronach is active, like every other class has tacked on to their ultimates. This isn't a poll; opinions without an argument don't work.

Actually, a statement such as 'deal with it' is a very, very valid statement. If you have ever played any other MMO's, you would know that class abilities are altered often, usually requiring players to alter there rotations/set-ups as what they were doing no longer works, as seemingly may be the case here. "Deal with it' is a fairly ubiquitous statement made in many threads of many MMO's if you look, and is the general principle we all have to abide by in MMO's at some point.

"Deal with it" is a valid response to someone asking the question "what can I do now that Storm Atronach has been nerfed?"

"Deal with it" is not a valid response to someone making the argument "the Storm Atronach nerf should be reversed because of XYZ."

Nightreaver

Persephonius wrote: »

Actually, a statement such as 'deal with it' is a very, very valid statement. If you have ever played any other MMO's, you would know that class abilities are altered often, usually requiring players to alter there rotations/set-ups as what they were doing no longer works, as seemingly may be the case here. "Deal with it' is a fairly ubiquitous statement made in many threads of many MMO's if you look, and is the general principle we all have to abide by in MMO's at some point.

I actually agree with everything you said there. My issue is when the players that tell us to "deal with" a change are the same people that couldn't "deal with" the original conception. As seems to be the case here.

One side couldn't deal with the Ultimate in its original form.
The other side can't deal with it in its new form.
So how about a solution that both sides can deal with?

I too am surprised the thread hasn't been closed.
Maybe the Devs are also still waiting to hear if there is any reason not to offer taunt as an option or to keep the AoE option.

Maverick827

Nightreaver wrote: »

Persephonius wrote: »

Actually, a statement such as 'deal with it' is a very, very valid statement. If you have ever played any other MMO's, you would know that class abilities are altered often, usually requiring players to alter there rotations/set-ups as what they were doing no longer works, as seemingly may be the case here. "Deal with it' is a fairly ubiquitous statement made in many threads of many MMO's if you look, and is the general principle we all have to abide by in MMO's at some point.

I actually agree with everything you said there. My issue is when the players that tell us to "deal with" a change are the same people that couldn't "deal with" the original conception. As seems to be the case here.

One side couldn't deal with the Ultimate in its original form.
The other side can't deal with it in its new form.
So how about a solution that both sides can deal with?

I too am surprised the thread hasn't been closed.
Maybe the Devs are also still waiting to hear if there is any reason not to offer taunt as an option or to keep the AoE option.

I have tagged @ZOS_GinaBruno‌ and @ZOS_JessicaFolsom‌ in this thread many times. They're probably just ignoring it.

One of their privileged pet raiding guilds complained about the taunt, so they changed it for them and the rest of us don't matter.

AtriasNaradan

Nightreaver wrote: »

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

You argue for the sake of arguing, should stop doin that.

This is apparently your response to everyone that disagrees with you.

I only use that to anyone who did argue for the sake of arguing. In your case, you replying to my first comment here for tanks using DPS point of view should already end the argument as there shouldn't anything valid to be argued, but you kept arguing, which makes you simply argue for the sake of arguing.

.............

Anyway, i never have a problem wether SA have taunt or not, doesn't really affect me the slightest, not on my sorceress, not on my other classess. My problem is only with any tanker who felt it's the end of the world for SA taunt to be removed...though it seems many decide to assume or twist my point of view into one that have a problem with SA having taunt. Other than that, my other problem is with a DPS sorceress who decide to argue with my comment about tank sorceress, using his/her DPS point of view :P

Maverick827

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

Nightreaver wrote: »

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

You argue for the sake of arguing, should stop doin that.

This is apparently your response to everyone that disagrees with you.

I only use that to anyone who did argue for the sake of arguing. In your case, you replying to my first comment here for tanks using DPS point of view should already end the argument as there shouldn't anything valid to be argued, but you kept arguing, which makes you simply argue for the sake of arguing.

.............

Anyway, i never have a problem wether SA have taunt or not, doesn't really affect me the slightest, not on my sorceress, not on my other classess. My problem is only with any tanker who felt it's the end of the world for SA taunt to be removed...though it seems many decide to assume or twist my point of view into one that have a problem with SA having taunt. Other than that, my other problem is with a DPS sorceress who decide to argue with my comment about tank sorceress, using his/her DPS point of view :P

You are the only one twisting words. Something doesn't have to be "the end of the world" - something no one here but you has said - for someone to speak out against it.

AtriasNaradan

Well, if a tank sorceress says they can't tank anymore and now it's a waste of their time raising a sorceress, just because SA don't have taunt...how can you not see it as them saying it's "the end of the world" for sorceress tanks to not have SA taunt.

Maverick827

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

Well, if a tank sorceress says they can't tank anymore and now it's a waste of their time raising a sorceress, just because SA don't have taunt...how can you not see it as them saying it's "the end of the world" for sorceress tanks to not have SA taunt.

Please show me where I said any of those things.

Armann

Maverick827 wrote: »

Nightreaver wrote: »

Persephonius wrote: »

Actually, a statement such as 'deal with it' is a very, very valid statement. If you have ever played any other MMO's, you would know that class abilities are altered often, usually requiring players to alter there rotations/set-ups as what they were doing no longer works, as seemingly may be the case here. "Deal with it' is a fairly ubiquitous statement made in many threads of many MMO's if you look, and is the general principle we all have to abide by in MMO's at some point.

I actually agree with everything you said there. My issue is when the players that tell us to "deal with" a change are the same people that couldn't "deal with" the original conception. As seems to be the case here.

One side couldn't deal with the Ultimate in its original form.
The other side can't deal with it in its new form.
So how about a solution that both sides can deal with?

I too am surprised the thread hasn't been closed.
Maybe the Devs are also still waiting to hear if there is any reason not to offer taunt as an option or to keep the AoE option.

I have tagged @ZOS_GinaBruno‌ and @ZOS_JessicaFolsom‌ in this thread many times. They're probably just ignoring it.

One of their privileged pet raiding guilds complained about the taunt, so they changed it for them and the rest of us don't matter.

This is what pisses me off, giving us the option to control the taunt is too hard (Y+LMB), plebs don't matter so let's remove it.

Nightreaver

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

you replying to my first comment here for tanks using DPS point of view should already end the argument as there shouldn't anything valid to be argued

You have this misconception that the SA with Taunt is solely a Tank issue. The purpose of my response was to illustrate that it isn't. It is in fact also used by DPS Sorcerers which contrary to your opinion is a valid argument for justification of a Summoned Atronach with Taunt.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

Anyway, i never have a problem wether SA have taunt or not

Your statements would indicate otherwise.

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

My only say in this is, if you need distractions to tank, then you're not a good tank.

I am fine with you or anyone else providing alternative suggestions that would allow Sorcerers "to deal" with the change. But you crossed the line when you start insulting someone else's methods just because they are different than yours. Have you ever seen Maverick827 tank? Who are you to decide that he isn't a good tank?

AtriasNaradan wrote: »

My main is a DK bad ass

From a post you made 08/15
After reading this I'm going to have a hard time taking your comments as anything more that a disgruntled DK who doesn't like the idea of a Sorcerer Tank being able to compete with a DK. Or using abilities that DKs don't have access to.

Merlin13KAGL

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

Wasn't all that shocked.

@vyndral13preub18_ESO‌, is that like an Atronach joke?

Probitas wrote: »

Strictly speaking, the SA is a sorceror ultimate and should grab aggro the moment it's dropped, like the other summons.

@Probitas‌, I don't know about aggro. I would think invoking fear would be a more likely response. NPC's/Monsters unrealistically never go into save-my-own-butt mode.

I would think an Atronach raining down from the sky would surely cause this

For most of the rest, here's a thought:

Sorcerers are supposed to be powerful...

As are Dragon Knights, Templars, and Nightblades, in no particular order.

Each class should have its perks and downfalls.

There's a huge difference between powerful and invincible.

Have you ever killed a Sorc? If you have, then the latter must not be true, huh?